Nader Emerging as the Threat Democrats Feared

[BeyondGeography]

By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
The New York Times

Published: October 15, 2004

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14 - With less than three weeks before the election, Ralph Nader is emerging as just the threat that Democrats feared, with a potential to tip the balance in up to nine states where President Bush and Senator John Kerry are running neck and neck.

Despite a concerted effort by Democrats to derail his independent candidacy, as well as his being struck off the Pennsylvania ballot on Wednesday, Mr. Nader will be on the ballots in more than 30 states.

Polls show that he could influence the outcomes in nine by drawing support from Mr. Kerry. They are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin.

Moreover, six - Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Wisconsin - were among the top 20 where Mr. Nader drew his strongest support in 2000. If the vote for Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry is as evenly divided as the polls suggest, the electoral votes in any one of those states could determine who becomes president.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/15/politics/campaign/15nader.html?hp&ex=1097812800&en=064f2a268f2f3127&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[The Chronicler]

1. ass <nm>

[The Zanti Regent]

24. Seelye lies again

Seelye has made it clear that she will lie any lie to keep her beloved Bush in the Whore House. Seeing that liar gush all over Bush during her live coverage made me sick.

Bob Somerby has this liar down COLD in his Daily Howler

http://www.dailyhowler.com/

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. I still can't figure out why anybody would vote for him.

That's just as hard to understand as Ralph himself.

[PartyPooper]

3. Many repukes will vote for him.

They want to tilt the election to *!

[Florida_Geek]

5. That may not be a joke

I know of repugs that will not vote for Bush, but can not vote for Kerry, so that leaves Nader.

[dweller]

12. so they vote for rowf .. .

and that helps *moron how?

seems to be more a threat to * than Kerry.

dp

[AndyTiedye]

56. Repukes voting for Nader help to tip it to Kerry

I can't imagine that there would be too many though.
Nader almost certainly hurts Kerry more.
Worst of all, having Nader on the ballot makes it
easier for Diebold to divert votes from Kerry.

[6th Borough]

58. Doubt it. Depending on their social issue stance, they will probably vote

For the Libertarian, Natural Law, or Constitution parties.

He might pick up a few in the states he is running as the Reform Party candidate...though I doubt it will be that many.

[Mz Pip]

4. Me, either

Who are these people who are liberal enough to support Ralph, know he has no chance of getting elected and know their vote could tip the balance to Bush? What do they think they are accomplishing?

MzPip
:dem:

[prolesunited]

9. Political purity

But with Nader accepting so much on the ground and financial support from the GOP, I don't know how they can maintain he is untainted.

[Born Free]

54. if they help the bush coward, they are as guilty as he

Anyone that does anything to help the bush coward retain control is as guilty as he is of the crimes against humanity he is proudly doing.

[Skip Intro]

6. nader has forever ruined his legacy

not to mention the ruin he has helped the rethugs heap upon our countrry.

I once respected the man. I now loathe him. He ranks no higher than gwbush and bloody company on my list.

fuck nader

[bluestateguy]

7. Ralph Nader hates America

This is a national emergency, but why should he care? It's not like Nader will suffer in a Bush Administration. He'll enjoy his Bush tax cut I'm sure.

Oh, and by the way, his book on the Corvair was a pile of shit. My father had a Corvair for 10 years and it never caused him any problems.

[Realityhack]

66. Nice point on the book.

That killed mid engine in the US. But the fact is if you know what the fuck you are doing they can actualy be safer. They are only dangerous in the hands of the average smaktard.

I always saw Nader as an ego driven reactionary. I agree with some of his stated positions but I would NEVER vote for him even if he did have a chance of winning. That reactionism scares me almost more than Bush's extreamism.

RH

[FlemingsGhost]

8. This is nonsense.

I live in the heart of what was "Nader Country," and I know of only handful of '00 supporters who are doing the same this time around.

If anything, Ralph might be used by GOP election operatives as a beard to filter off Kerry votes. Don't be surprised if, miraculously, Nader gets significantly more votes than at which he has been polling.

[KittyWampus]

10. Stupid Mediawhore, You Think Dangling Bogus Threat Of Nader

will help Bush?

You are wrong.

Democrats know that the mediawhores' polls are weighted to favor the GOP and that Kerry is about 6 points ahead already.

We know that he is going to win as the vast majority of undecideds have found him a more than acceptable alternative to Bush.

Kerry will NOT allow this Election to be stolen. And he has hundreds of thousands of deeply committed activists to back him up.

We LOVE Kerry for who he is... not just because he is not Bush.

Nader is just an excuse for the GOP to try and steal this election, to demoralize Democrats.

In the end, the many moderate Republicans who can't stand Bush will probably be the only ones who vote Nader... and a few stupid college age kids....

Fuck you Seelye, I hope you choke on your bias.

[FlemingsGhost]

17. For the record, I do not "love" Kerry. Far from it, really.

Futhermore, I--along with many, many others--are, indeed, voting for him simply because he is not Bush.

Absolutely no affection for the DLC, here. On November 3rd, they'll find out just how prevelent that feeling is amongst their Party "faithful."

[Media_Lies_Daily]

11. If the really die-hard among the Greens give him more than 1%...

...of the vote, I'd be greatly surprised.

I think the vast majority of Greens "get it", that this election is a watershed event, one that will have major historic implications if we fail to derail the NeoCons.

[UCLA Dem]

13. Nader's delusional. I think he really gone off the deep end.

[LSU Tigahs]

43. thats why I don't hate him. . .

b/c I believe he truly believes he's doing the right thing.

[Realityhack]

67. I don't hate him because of that...

I am SCARED of him because of that. It reminds me of people hawking weapons systems to small dictators who truely beleve they are doing the right thing. They just SCARE me.

Its the people who know they are fucking you and do it anyway that I hate.

RH

[madaboutharry]

14. She is full of it.

I know a number of 2000 Nader voters since I live in that kind of a town. None of them, not one, is voting for Nader. They all get it. I do know, however, of a couple of republicans who won't vote for Bush and can't bring themselves to vote for Kerry who are thinking of voting for Nader.

[GaryL]

15. Author folks.

I tend to find Seelye full of shit. I stick to Krugman and Kristoff. I advise everyone to do the same.

[MADem]

16. You said exactly what I was thinking n/t

[stepnw1f]

18. The Boogey Man.... whatever

More distractions

[Skittles]

19. the idea anyone ever actually supported Nader

it makes me sick

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KittyWampus]

22. You Should Learn A Little Bit More About Kerry Before Calling Him A

douchbag.

Unless you are projecting... in which case, I sympathize with you.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[progressivebydesign]

25. So.. you think Obama calls Kerry a "douchebag"?

He's figured so prominently in your posts, yet your opening in the DU community is anything but Obama-like. It's harsh... I guess some people just naturally take the high road. ANd others, jump into an online community made up of mostly Kerry supporters and call their candidate a douchebag. Bad form. Not a great way to get started here.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fujiyama]

26. Maybe you haven't heard about Nader's recent tactics...

Nader can go fuck himself. Anyone that takes money from Swift Boat Liars can go to hell. At this point, Nader is no better than Bush himself.

BTW can you explain why it is Kerry is such a "douchebag"?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fujiyama]

30. I'd say there is a great comparison

Nader obviously doesn't care what happens to the future of this country. If he did he would not by lying all the time.

Nader has every right to run, but he's not getting on many of the ballots legitimately (many of the signatures are fraudulent), the signatures are mostly republicans with the intention of drawing votes from Kerry, and finally the money he is recieving is from ass holes like the Swift Boat Liars and other RW groups (anti immigration, anti gay groups, etc). Now he claims that the SBT are giving him money because they agree with him? WTF?

Now, if this doesn't bother you, then you are completely deluded. Now, I agree there are problems within the party, and I think Al Gore made some mistakes with his campaign...but I must question why you feel you can come to a message board, attack all of us for supporting the party's candidate, and then defending a person doing all they can to get Bush elected again.

[LSU Tigahs]

32. Kerry is no ghandi when it comes to campaign contributions. . .

"according to Charles Lewis, executive director of the campaign finance watchdog group the Center for Public Integrity in his new book, "The Buying of the President." In the mid 1990s, Johnny Chung illegally funneled $8,000 to Kerry. This month arms contractor Bob Majumder pleaded guilty to illegally funneling between $13,000 and $25,000 to Kerry. Kerry wrote 28 letters from 1996 to 1999 supporting Majumder for federal funds for a proposed missile system. The company received $150 million in federal funds."



http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0227-01.htm

[fujiyama]

49. What is your point?

I never claimed Kerry was perfect. I'm sure he's taken money from some people I don't like over the years.

I do however believe he has many fine qualities and he would make a great president. I also don't see how the media conglomerates would have any more sway under a Kerry administration than a Bush administration. Even if Viacom and others have given money to Dems (and I know they have), they've probably given much more to republicans. It's not as though these same media conglomerates have given friendly (or even balanced coverage) toward dems in general.

BTW, the article also mentions that Kerry clearly was never actually accused of wrongdoing.

If you want to keep defending Nader's self righteous path to nowhere, keep doing so. Also, I noticed that you never replied to Nader recieving the contributions from RW groups and help from republicans in getting on ballots. You simply stated that Kerry has also accepted money before from some unsavory characters. If NAder's so self righteous why is he accepting this money? Why doesn't he give it back? Can he seriously be deluded into believing the SBT and the various other RW groups agree with liberal stances on the issues? He's squandering what was a relatively good legacy. Back in the day he did some good work.

[sandnsea]

57. Things aren't always as they seem

I suspect we'll be seeing alot of "nader supporters" over the next 2 weeks. Distract, discourage, disrupt, all kinds of games going on. Some are just a bit "too obvious" and are best ignored. They'll get bored and go away or out themselves and get booted.

[Forkboy]

31. Someone isn't going to be here long

[The_Casual_Observer]

29. So the genius from LSU is informed about Kerry, do tell!

The genius from LSU of course didn't do anything but sling mud, so the genius lied. The genius from LSU does posts 4 & 5 that are stupid and have no merit.
The genius from LSU ought to get lost.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

I've heard decaf helps this problem

[The_Casual_Observer]

37. The Genius from LSU left off the Toby Keith part

It's a witless freeper pretending to be a wild eyed progressive in order to slam Kerry. Like this is the first time a dope has tried this here!

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

41. I do have problems with Kerry

Seriously,try the decaf.

[The_Casual_Observer]

46. I have problems with Kerry too

But nothing that a little decaf won't fix.

[LSU Tigahs]

34. sorry (accidental double post)

[Andromeda]

53. You sound very uninformed, and that's sad.

If Nader had his way things would get worse, and worse and worse.... Nader has absolutely nothing to offer. He is a shell of the man he was 30 years ago (probably before you were born).

That was then and this is now. Nader is a desperate opportunist who will take money from anybody, even Republicans, to get his name on the ballot.

Kerry is a wonderful candidate and will do great things for this country. I can't wait for the election so we can kick Bush back to Crawford.

[cosmicone]

21. Nader won't be a factor

.. this time around.

90% of Nader voters in 2000 took Gore's victory for granted and thought they had a free vote without risking anything.

This time, everyone knows what happens.

Nader has forever destroyed his legacy and image. I don't think Nader's charities will get a dime from people like me ever.

[Milo_Bloom]

33. Question....

Been lurking for a while, but I just had to say something on this topic, since this is a discussion I have had with many people lately.

Does anyone really believe that there is anyone left who, but for Ralph Nader, would vote for Kerry?

I just don't see any credibility to the argument that Nader votes (especially this time around) translate into Kerry votes. I think but for Nader some of the other progressive parties (Peace and Freedom, etc) would see a few more votes each, but I honestly don't believe that one of these current batch of Nader votes would otherwise vote for John Kerry.

I was originally planning on voting 3rd party (not for Nader), but after watching the debates, Kerry did enough to get me to vote for him. He still isn't the candidate I would really want (That would have been Howard Dean), but I am satisfied enough to pull the level for him.

But, back to the main question, again, seriously, is Nader REALLY a factor? I just don't see it.

[fujiyama]

38. At this point

I'm starting to agree with you.

This late in the game, anyone that is so hell bent on voting for Nader is unlikely to vote for Kerry anyways. They've seen what Bush has done to the country. I can't see someone thinking, "oh Nader isn't on the ballot...I guess I'll just vote for Kerry now". My guess is that such a person would vote green or write him in.

If supposed ideaological purity is that important (and I would have to wonder why Nader is considered that pure), they won't vote for Kerr anyways.

The important thing isn't to attack Nader for running. That's irrelevant. It's his lies that both candidates are the same, that the difference isn't that great. That's a major lie.

Also Nader's main source of monetary support is republicans, as has been the source for the signatures which has put him on the ballots.

[Milo_Bloom]

44. What freaks me out...

Is that I think the "dems" give Nader more credibility by fighting him so hard. Why waste resources and effort getting him struck from ballots and making his supporters (who are lost anyway) fight even harder for him.

Turn it all around. Use Nader to your advantage. Nader talks about how bad Bush is and then argues that the parties are exactly the same.

Not true, but maybe from their perspective it seems true.

Think of it like this. The Nader loyalists want radical and drastic changes. Immediate results and a complete reversal of many many years of foreign and domestic policy. Think of how FAR we would have to go to satisfy them. Now, consider a distance analogy. A trip from NY to AUSTRALIA might seem like a long trip and a big distance, but compare that trip to say a trip from here to mars. Suddenly NY and AUSTRALIA seem like they are in exactly the same place. They're not, but to someone considering a trip to mars, NY to AUSTRALIA doesn't seem like much.

Now remind the Nader person that throughout the history of the US, changes happen slowly over time and are usually established with baby steps. Look at Brown vs The Board of Education. Radical change? Not really, it was preceded by years of precedent cases, establishing integration in graduate schools and colleges. Before people decided to go to the moon and to mars, they had to figure out how to get from NY to Australia.

John Kerry is the "first step" toward that new agenda. From their perspective, he may not be THAT different than the republicans, but he is closer to what they want than what Bush will ever be. If we keep working on the Senate and the House and stay active, after 8 years of Kerry we can work toward a more progressive candidate in 2012 and so on.

[fujiyama]

52. Interesting analogy

and some great ideas.

I understand the frustration in some of these voters with the system. As much as I like Kerry (and at this point I'm firmly pro Kerry, not just anti Bush), I know I've had some big disagreements with him. For example, I definetely don't think this war can be won. In fact, I believe it was lost before it began. It was the nature of the war itself, the invasion with no justification, and his vote for what was obvious to many as a blank check. I agree with many that the vote was a dissapointment. However I also know that the way Bush and Rove had structured it, that it would be difficult either way. If Kerry had voted against it, he would have been accused of not wanting to ever bring Saddam to justice - complicating the matters is the fact that he voted against the first Gulf War. Now, I myself agree with that vote, but it's understandable that many senators feel that they made the "wrong vote" on that war.

He has reassured me though that his vote for the resolution wasn't a vote for the war itself. It was to keep Saddam accountable - and mainly a vote for the weapons inspectors to go in and be effective. I've come to the conclusion that Kerry himself never would have invaded Iraq. That was important for me...and that I believe is VERY important for people to know.

The way I've always seen it is that voting your conscience is important, but a conscience by itself means nothing if it is not effective and smartly executed. Also the nature of the winner takes all style of American politics is what makes it difficult for other smaller voices to have any real effect. I suppose electoral reform would be a great idea (IRV, etc) but there is little likelyhood of those measures passing anytime soon. A better first step would be to educate the public of these ideas and see what they thought of it. At the moment most people barely understand the EC, let alone IRV and other things.

Ultimately, I think you get it right with the analogy...This election is eiter about moving forward to some extent, or clearly moving much farther backward. I too would love to have quick progress, but there will always be electoral limits. As you said, by moving the House and Senate toward Democratic control, and also by keeping the pressure on DURING their term, only then can progress be achieved. And by doing that, you can move the country's attitudes and politics along as well.

BTW, Welcome to DU.

[Swamp Rat]

35. Afraid of PodMan? ... not.

[LongTomH]

60. My God....That's Hideous!

Ralph looks more like something from "Night of the Living Dead" than Superman!

[WhiteTara]

63. Well, yeah

[Swamp Rat]

64. He's not supposed to look like Superman.

He IS PodMan, and he's come to save us!

Hint: He works for the alien lizards.

Don't vote for Bush! He's an alien lizard!

[AverageJoe]

36. Don't feed the cajun troll

Just my two cents

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Seabiscuit]

45. Nothin' wrong with that... but you miss the point

Your flames and smears undermine your credibility - no one believes you are what/who you claim to be. Progressive democrat, my ass. It's already been hinted at where you came from, so I won't repeat it here.

[Forkboy]

42. but they're fun

chew toys are rare around here :D

[Seabiscuit]

47. The troll's posts are being deleted as we speak...

[Forkboy]

48. Dont those mods ever sleep!?!?!?!?!

:evilgrin:

[fujiyama]

50. I gotta admit

they are kinda fun. Sure, debating Nader is pointless but there's something so nostalgic about it (haha, those good ole Nasty green/dem flame wars...I know, I know, Nader isn't even a green)...

;)

[sweetheart]

51. Is there any possibility of nader throwing his support to kerry?

I realize the divisiveness of nader's candidacy, and am suprised
that he's still alive, to be frank... but i can't help but wonder
whether he has gone completely insane, or whether he thinks that
this time round, he'll make a rousing call for liberals of all sorts
to get rid of this bush, and join with us in making a better world.

[Andromeda]

55. Dream on -- nice idea but not realistic.

I don't see him throwing any support to anybody but himself.

He doesn't care about a better world. He is a meglomaniac who only sees himself as the leader of the Free World.

[LisaL]

59. Hmm. No.

[robbedvoter]

61. Winnona LaDuke just endorsed Kerry - a conscience vote she said

Funny how the Libertarian guy still not getting any ink - and he's in 48 states - WITHOUT ANY FRAUD.

[fujiyama]

65. Wow

Good for her. It looks like NAder has lost just about everyone.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

62. Nope, he isn't

The media just NEEDS him to. It's getting a bit boring droning on about Cheney's lesbian daughter.

[samtob]

68. Here is how he could be a threat.

There was an editorial in the paper here a couple of months ago. The writer did not state his party orientation, and gave two examples on a vote swap plan.

Here is what he proposed.
Through chat room / forum connections a person in a state where it is a given one party will win (non battle state) will promise to swap a vote with a person in a battle state to disrupt the outcome.

Example;

Utah is going to go to *, that is a given. The Utah voter connects with a Nader voter in let's say Ohio. Since Nader is NOT going to win, and his objective is to get vote numbers, not electoral votes, the Utah voter will pledge to vote for Nader, if the Nader voter in Ohio votes for *, or Kerry.

Like I said in his example he used both Bush and Kerry in examples, so I am not sure what party is participating in this, OR, if there is much participation in this concept as I do not make a habit of hanging out in the Nader forums.

[samtob]

69. Geez, forgive all the typos and improper grammer n/t